David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (3):497-528 (1998)
According to Kant in the Prolegomena, the natural kind proposition (GYM) "Gold is a yellow metal" is analytically true, necessary, and a priori. Saul Kripke and Hilary Putnam have argued that on the contrary propositions such as (GYM) are neither analytic, nor necessary, nor a priori. The Kripke-Putnam view is based on the doctrine of "scientific essentialism" (SE). It is a direct consequence of SE that propositions such as (GE) "Gold is the element with atomic number number 79" are metaphysically necessary and a posteriori. Were Kant to travel by time-machine to the present and to consider (GE), however, he would regard it as metaphysically contingent; and even if he were able to admit it as necessary, it would be synthetic a priori, and not a posteriori. In these ways, the conflict between Kant and the scientific essentialists is a sharply-defined one: if the essentialists are right, then the Kantian theory of meaning, necessity, and a priori knowledge is wrong; but if Kant is right, then SE is wrong. As a prolegomenon to the development and defense of Kant's positive theory of natural kind propositions, this paper undertakes a Kantian critique of SE. Following the Introduction, the paper has three sections. The first section spells out the main theses and assumptions of SE. The second section, setting aside the semantic and logical components of SE, focuses on its epistemic and metaphysical components and offers four Kantian arguments against them. The final section offers Kantian "diagnoses" of the flaws in SE exposed by the four critical arguments
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
James Kreines (2009). Kant on the Laws of Nature: Laws, Necessitation, and the Limitation of Our Knowledge. European Journal of Philosophy 17 (4):527-558.
Similar books and articles
George Bealer (1987). The Philosophical Limits of Scientific Essentialism. Philosophical Perspectives 1:289-365.
James R. O.’Shea (2011). How to Be a Kantian and a Naturalist About Human Knowledge. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:327-359.
Friedel Weinert (2005). Einstein and Kant. Philosophy 80 (4):585-593.
Ragnar Fjelland (1991). The Theory-Ladenness of Observations, the Role of Scientific Instruments, and the Kantian a Priori. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (3):269 – 280.
Tuomas E. Tahko (2008). A New Definition of A Priori Knowledge: In Search of a Modal Basis. Metaphysica 9 (2):57-68.
Ash Gobar (1988). Erklärung and Begründung in Kantian Epistemology. Philosophy Research Archives 14:343-358.
Steffen Ducheyne (2011). Kant and Whewell on Bridging Principles Between Metaphysics and Science. Kant-Studien 102 (1):22-45.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #53,895 of 1,700,300 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #105,649 of 1,700,300 )
How can I increase my downloads?